I oppose this, but not on 10th Amendment grounds. The 2nd Amendment is unique among the Bill of Rights in that there are no limitations on the right to keep and bear arms. It 'shall not be infringed.' The others, for example the 1st Amendment, all have limitations on the rights, and therefore limitations on the delegated authority of the federal govenment to secure those rights. But under the 2nd Amendment, the federal government is charged to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not infringed, which means the 10th Amendment does not apply since there is a delegated power.

What I disagree with is the idea that it takes a further act of Congress to enable this right. That equally implies that another act of Congress could take it away. The Supreme Court needs to read the Constitution, including the 'full faith and credit' clause and make concealed carry licenses valid in any jurisdiction- including on federal property.

The only restriction on the right to keep and bear arms is that it is applied to 'the people'. That is the body of citizens who are bound by that contract among ourselves called the Constitution. The direct and unambiguous way to interpret that is anyone who can vote is part of 'the People.' Since the states get to decide who can vote within their sovereign territory, it is reasonable to say that the states can determine who is qualified to carry a weapon (leaving out minors, those who are not competent mentally, criminals, etc.) Once the state determines someone is a valid voter, then they are part of 'the People' and their right to keep and bear arms *shall* not be infringed - by anyone. Your voter's registration card is your concealed carry permit.